Loading...
MEETING MINUTES AV 29-2021(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 1 AREA VARIANCE NO. 29-2021 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II TREVOR FLYNN, BALZER & TUCK ARCHITECTURE OWNER(S) DANIEL GRASMEDER ZONING WR LOCATION 3222 ROUTE 9L (REVISED) APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT AN 884 SQ. FT. LIVING ROOM/KITCHEN ADDITION TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING PRIMARY DWELLING, A 436 SQ. FT. BREEZEWAY ADDITION TO THE SOUTH OF THE PRIMARY DWELLING, CONNECTING THE EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE AND REORIENTATION OF THE ROOF ON THE GARAGE. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE OF 1,315 SQ. FT. WHICH WOULD INCLUDE TWO LEVELS AND A HEIGHT OF 18 FEET 11 ½ INCHES. SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA, NEW BUILDING WITHIN 50 FT. OF 15% SLOPES, EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE, AND MAJOR STORMWATER. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SHORELINE SETBACK, HEIGHT OF DETACHED GARAGE, HEIGHT OF THE ALTERATIONS TO THE MAIN HOME, NUMBER OF GARAGES, AND SIZE OF GARAGE. CROSS REF SP 9-2021; AV 8-2021; AV 76-2002; AV 43-02; AV 27-2002 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING MAY 2021 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 3.27 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 239.18-1-48 SECTION 179-3-040; 179-5-020; 179-13-010. TREVOR FLYNN & DANIEL GRASMEDER, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 29-2021, Trevor Flynn, Balzar & Tuck Architecture, Meeting Date: June 16, 2021 “Project Location: 3222 Route 9L Description of Proposed Project: (Revised) Applicant proposes to construct an 884 sq. ft. living room/kitchen addition to the west of the existing primary dwelling, a 436 sq. ft. breezeway addition to the south of the primary dwelling, connecting the existing detached garage and reorientation of the roof on the garage. The project also includes construction of a new detached garage of 1,315 sq. ft. which would inclu de two levels and height of 18 ft. 11 ½ inches. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, new building within 50 ft. of 15% slopes, expansion of a nonconforming structure, and major stormwater. Relief requested for shoreline setback, height of detached garage, height of the alterations to the main home, number of garages, and size of garage. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for shoreline setback of main home, height of the alterations to the main home and the new garage, number of garages, and size of garage. Parcel is located in the Waterfront Residential zone –WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, 179-5-020 garage, 179-13-010 expansion of non-conforming structure, 179- 2-010 garage, private parking The single-story addition to the main home is to be located 56.6 ft. from the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required. The two roof dormer additions of the home are to be 33 ft. 6 inches where 28 ft. is the maximum height allowed. The new garage is to be reduced to 18 ft. 11 ½ inches previously 21 ft. 4 inches in height where an accessory structure is limited to 16 ft. Relief is also requested to have more than one garage and size of the garage 1,220 sq. ft. floor area where maximum size allowed on lot would be 1,100 sq. ft. (Noting the garage lower level is 644 sq. ft., the upper level is 576 sq. ft.; the workshop is 644 sq. ft. and is not considered in the garage floor area due to the features associated with the workshop—wood floor workbench but is accounted for /added in the total floor area of buildings on the site). Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to orientation of the existing building on the parcel, parcel shape and parcel topography within 75 ft. of the shoreline for height and setback. The second garage may be eliminated to reduce the number of garages; although the second garage is storage and workshop for classic vehicles. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minor for the residential requests and substantial for the second garage request as relevant to the code. The relief for the single-story addition to the main home is 18.4 ft. The relief for the two roof dormer additions is 5 feet 6 inches in excess. The new garage relief is 2 feet 11 1/2 inches in ex cess. Relief is also requested to have more than one garage and size of the garage. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 2 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes residential additions to the main home, alterations to portions of the three floors, connecting the existing detached garage with a new roof orientation, then constructing a detached garage. The project includes new stormwater controls, site work to reduce runoff, and landscaping for the site. The plans show the additions and the portion of the dormer roof additions that are above the 28 ft. but match the existing structure height. There are elevation views and floor plans for the proposed work on the home and the new garage. The second garage is presented as a workshop for antique vehicles. The Board had tabled the application for additional information on the second garage that has been revised to reduce the height.” MR. MC CABE-So we’ve had quite a bit of discussion on this particular project. So if I could kind of summarize here. What we have is a structure that’s nonconforming. It’s too close to the water and it’s too tall, and so you’re going to do some alterations to this. Plus there’s an existing garage and you’d like to have a second garage. Is that a pretty accurate description of what’s going on here? MR. FLYNN-Yes, I think that sums it up. In general we’re back in front of the Board based on an APA variance reversal letter and I think it’s important to note that they didn’t have any opinion on the detached garage. Their comments were based on the additions to the nonconforming residence, the dwelling towards the lake. So I think our goal overall tonight is to focus more on t he garage as we believe from our last meeting in May there was more discussion around the garage, the garage use, the height and overall size of the garage. So with your permission we’d like to mainly focus on the garage tonight. MR. MC CABE-And that’s fine. MR. FLYNN-And then re-visit the residence as needed. If we need to discuss it, we’re prepared to discuss it, but we want to be concise and save your time tonight. As mentioned, we were here, got our variances and then during February of this year on the 24th those were overturned by the APA and then we’re back here in front of you. Laura, could you go to the next slide, please. I think the point overall is that during that February we came in front of you guys, there was mention of the height of the garage. We were at 26 feet. The garage was 1345 feet and we had four bays initially. Right away within that next week we came back to you guys, lowered the height and also decreased the amount of bays, reduced the overall footprint of the garage and we were granted our variances. Understanding that it’s null and void here. This is a separate application from back then, but I just wanted to bring you up to speed on the history of where we’ve been to date. Since then we’ve been reversed by the APA and we came back in May with a garage height of 21 feet 4 inches and an area of 1248 square feet. We’ve worked with the client a great deal to really understand the overall structure, the lifts, how the garage is used to reduce the square footage yet again in an effort to also bring down the height and the slope of the roof, yet still for the car lifts to work. So we’re here tonight asking for 18 feet 11 and a half inches for our height and the overall garage area at 1220 square feet. Laura, if you could just jump to Page Four. And to reacquaint you with the project overall, it is an existing 1920’s house, and it also contains a detached garage that was built in 2003 and the project overall involves taking that existing detached garage and attaching it. We wanted to note, it’s important to note that those three bays at the attached garage now at the residence is currently for every day parking for our clients and their daughter. So there’s three bays, three cars that they’re parking there ev ery day, summer and most importantly winter months to use those spaces. We also wanted to note from a previous meeting we were originally not targeting storage in the attic trusses for that roof, but after several meetings and studies of the interiors we’ve noticed that there’s very limited storage in the house. We were targeting under the new addition for that storage but there’s a lot of ledge and bedrock and that’s going to be extra costs added, extremely added costs to the client. So the most economical location was attic trusses above that existing garage which is important to note because it does also limit a lift that could go in that attached garage. The function and putting a lift in that garage does not work for everyday use and our clients walked us through how he uses the garage and you’ll start to see in some of the images these cars as they’re taken apart over the course of the years, how much space that takes up and could be a safety issue if it’s attached to the garage. We also noticed that the new detached garage is also being proposed as the existing does not provide enough space for the owner and he spends a great deal of time working on these cars and it’s an ideal hobby that he really enjoys. I think it’s hard to see, but on this diagram these two areas in red. So this is the existing site plan and the proposed. We wanted to bring this up because this was a key argument for the APA and the development overall. They wanted to understand how much impervious area was impacting within the 75 foot setback. So you’ll see the existing driveway and existing residence and then the proposed addition and the existing portion of the residence. The existing square footage within that 75 foot setback was 2,617 square feet. The proposed now is 1557 square feet. So there was a 40% reduction in the overall impervious area within that setback, and along with that we’ve also introduced stormwater management that was not in place for the existing site plan. It’s even hard to tell (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 3 in, I think if we can pull up that image as well, these areas within the exiting driveway are actually all bedrock and ledge rock that’s exposed, here, here and in some areas down there. Now that doesn’t count towards impervious area, but I think it’s also important to note that we think the addition to the existing garage is, the addition to the house is starting to aid in some of the stormwater devices in preventing water from shedding all the way down the existing driveway and into the lake. So just another point on the addition to the house. And also we have added substantial amounts of shoreline buffers which I know it’s more of a Planning Board note, but we also would like to point that out to you. So this is the existing shoreline buffer and wooded areas and we’re adding a shoreline buffer across the entire lawn area to prevent any runoff. So on this, you know, there was also discussions on adding the detached garage or the three, the bays needed for the hobby down by the existing house. We’ve looked at multiple iterations, but just to walk you quickly through three proposed thoughts. The first is an addition to the south. Here where we looked at adding three, it’s essentially the two car bays that are needed and a third bay that is storage and additional workshop area as well. And you’ll see that in the floor plans, that’s the garage, but as we looked to locate the garage and there bays and workshop area to the existing part of the garage, bringing this up, because it wouldn’t require a height variance, but there’s not enough room on the site and we were, again, encroaching into the side yard setback requiring an additional variance. So we would be here for seven instead of six variances. The second is a detached garage to the south, again, across from the existing garage, and you also see in the image, if Laura is able to pull that up, and this is all ledge rock, and they’ve actually blasted in the past for the existing septic field. So that existing septic field would have to be re-located, and ironically it’s the most up to date. So this is a great view of what exists on site. This is the paved area and this is the ledge rock which ultimately goes vertical and then the septic field is just beyond so that septic field would have to be re-located. This is also important to note on the sides of the garage, both here, on the sides of the driveway here and here, that’s the existing ledge rock that we were discussing earlier. They look like they’re impervious areas on the site, but they’re really all ledge rock. This side it’s just the driveway. Could we go back to the site plan, please. Thank you. So again the second option of placing the garage here doesn’t really work with some of the existing utilities on site and the ledge rock as well. The third was looking to add to the existing garage, but what that starts to do is it starts to block all the stormwater measures that we’ve been putting in place to date and starts to encumber and really close off the entry, this is the entry door within the front of the residence. So it would close off the addition and wouldn’t allow nature light as well into that space. We wanted to point out that as you approach the proposed detached garage location, from a view shed perspective it’s not seen from the road at all from any angle. It’s a very heavily wooded area and I think you’ll also see on our diagrams and perspectives that it’s set and tucked into the hill. So I just wanted to point it out it’s not visible really from the road or neighboring sites. So the perspective, this is just a good point of view of how we’re tucking the garage into the hillside and locating the two driveways, the lower level towards the storage of cars and car parts at the upper level. It’s just the two bays and the workshop. So as we look at the plans, this is that lower level storage area and stairs leading up to a workshop and two car bays with car lifts. You’ll see that in a section as well, just to demonstrate the height required for those. We did want to point out that we have, in a sense, tried to squeeze down this workshop area and bay areas to reduce the square footage again since we were last here and previously we have also looked at a one story structure on the site and what that starts to do is it’s roughly 72 feet by 32 feet deep and as a result there’s a larger footprint compared to what we’re proposing tonight. So we’d be asking for more of a variance in regards to square footage of the footprint and just overall general disturbance on the site. The bank barn essentially allows us to provide those two access points and minimize the footprint. So in reference to height, you’ll note there’s this red dashed coche that traces the top of the building. This was our previous hei ght that we were asking for and we’ve lowered it since then. This dashed line that follows the period, that’s the 16 feet. So it’s really just this small portion right at the peak which is our highest asking for that 18 feet 11 and a half foot. Again, we’re really trying to pay homage to the existing architecture of the existing house. This is the gateway element as you’re traveling down the driveway. It kind of sets the tone for the overall site, and we want to properly accentuate the architecture and relate that to the existing portions of the house, and again we’re asking for 2.9 feet in relief. MR. KUHL-2.11. Didn’t you originally say that you needed height because of the lifts? MR. FLYNN-Yes, so the next page, could we zoom in slightly? So Dan doesn’t like when I bring this point up, but as Dan tends to age in place it’s tougher for him to work on these cars through the years. So a car lift is extremely important to him rather than laying down underneath the car on his back. We wanted to show, you know, previously in other designs we were looking at a more economical structural system, looking at roof trusses, you know, a scissor truss, sand as we’ve brought down this height more and more we switched to a more costly stick built structure and I think it’s important to note, just even perceived from the exterior to interior, you know, this is a 16 inch ridge beam currently just to withstand and hold that structure and then stick built rafters. The next important to note is the garage door itself. Breaking on the minimal clearance of a garage door from the ceiling and following that slope that further encumbers into the space itself. What we’re currently showing right now is Dan’s 1966 Thunderbird and it’s lifted at a six foot six height. So a comfortable position to come in underneath the car and work on it. We don’t anticipate it needing to be much taller, but really we couldn’t go too much lower without it not hitting the door in that area. This is also limiting Dan’s ability to work on larger cars in the future, but I think he’s sacrificed a lot to work with you guys and work within the zoning code. I think the heights we were asking for before were as a result of looking to work on larger cars in the future, and like I say that comes (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 4 with sacrifice and ergonomic solutions for working on these cars. So I think I’ve hit a lot on the site aspects overall but we have gotten a signoff letter from the Town Engineer and it has been approved. We are treating a lot of the surface water runoff currently on the site which was currently untreated prior, and there’s, you know, we’re also limiting that impervious area within the setback that you guys saw on that previous slide, reducing it by 40% and including additional stormwater measures of the shoreline buffers, additional planters and plantings and permeable pavers as well as grass swales. So I think that’s all I have, you know, staying focused on the garage and limiting the time on that. I was going to hand it over to Dan to walk you through how he uses the garage. MR. GRASMEDER-Thanks, Trevor. I appreciate it, and so hopefully this will be a little bit more fun. It’s good to get see all of you again. Thanks for your time. After last meeting I really felt like I nee ded to communicate to the Zoning Board of Appeals the type of work that I enjoy doing in my workshop. It seems like there’s confusion relative to what I do. I don’t do maintenance on cars. That’s just not true. Like everyone else, if I can get the $25 coupon for Jiffy Lube that’s where I get my oil changed. I don’t want to do that type of work on my own. It makes no sense for me to have to deal with oil changes and other maintenance type activities when I can get it done for $24.99 or better if you bought the app while you’re there. They can deal with the mess, even on the classic cars. I bring them to Jiffy Lube each year for maintenance and I get that done when I get them inspected. The same thing for finished body work and painting. I don’t do that. I don’t do my own paint work because you can tell. There’s a difference from a, that type of activity is really best left to the professionals. So I’ll quickly go through at least a few of the projects that I’ve worked on over the years. So if you guys are interested I’ve got other copies of the slides. So, again, you’re inside my garage. Back in 2007 I appeared in front of this Board asking for a second garage variance on our previous property, and I believe Mr. Underwood, at the t ime you were the Chair, and you had asked me if my ’58 truck had a super hurricane six, and it does, and at that point I went forward with building the other garage. Our former property size was much smaller than the current one. It’s approximately a one acre lot, and my workshop is 24 by 24. So the picture that you’re seeing up here is a 24 by 24 interior views if you will. I spent better than 12 years working on my projects in that space until we moved last year. This blue car down in the bottom center, it’s a little bit small there. That’s a 1965 Convertible that I bought back in 1995. I actually restored it twice. The original restoration took me seven years. It started before we moved to Queensbury and thanks to a car fire I got to re -do it a second time. So it actually burned from the radiator all the way to the back seat. With this car I really learned that I like working on them as much as or more than actually driving them. These photos really illustrate why I’m looking for some more room, but the 24 by 24 it’s tight and floor space really becomes a premium. That’s why I use a rolling scaffold as a workbench and the proposed garage for the Lake George workshop, the working bay is actually smaller. It’s 24 by 23, but I’ll now have that extra adjacent area to work on items that have been removed from the cars. These photos really illustrate the extent to which I dissemble in order to re-assemble. I’ll put it that way. You may wonder why do I disassemble a complete car, an d basically every nut and bolt needs reconditioning. The seat cushions, covers have disintegrated, body gaskets are dry rotted. The floors need to be replaced, which was in that previous one, and my goal is to get these cars back to the condition they were coming off the assembly line like new. That’s really what car restoration is and is to me. When they’re parked there’s extended periods of time, I need the space to be able to store the pieces, literally the pieces. If you want to jump to the nex t one, the Model A. Four years ago I was looking for a new project and met a guy from the Adirondack A’s if you’re familiar with them. They’re cool group of old guys that like Model A’s, and the club runs a youth program. That’s in that lower corner there, the work in progress thing, but they restore a car from bumper to bumper with a group of a dozen kids age 14 to 18. The goal is to try to get young people interested in a hobby because unfortunately as these members of the Adirondack A’s, I’m probably one of the youngest guys on it, pass away, they’re children aren’t interested in keeping their cars. The youth program is right up my alley. That’s why I ended up joining it, and so I decided, hey, I want to join it, learn a new car and support the club. So I found this car. I refer to it as John Boy. Down in Plymouth, Massachusetts. Unfortunately our maiden voyage John Boy ended up stripping the gear. It’s actually the fiber gear on the cam shaft. So I had to disassemble. That’s what that center picture is, disassembly the entire front end of the car. The two photos in the bottom right I like, which I think are impactful for this group. They’re telling concern in why Kathy and I are attracted to the house that we’re showing you and the work that we’re doing on this house in Lake George and why we’re restoring it. The car and the house were built around the same time. So it’s a 1931 Model A and for the Model A I added all knew brake lights, turn signals to bring it up to current safety standards. The plan is to bring the home to modern standards and while maintaining the character and the beauty of the original really for generations to come. One more, and I just want to give you a feel for, again, it gets back to some of the questions why do I do this, why do I enjoy it. I want to show you these slides because part of what I do in my workshop is really the reaction I get from people when they see the cars, and these photos were taken at the height of COVID, so last May, and again with that group the Adirondack A’s. During the lockdown in May 2020, the idea actually came from my mother in the Philadelphia area. Gosh, Danny, wouldn’t it be great if people did a drive -in car show and brought it to our community because they were locked up at the time. My mother’s in her mid-80’s, and so we got the idea and we did it here. We did it with six area senior communities. Look in the top right corner, it’s a little hard to see, but the people, you can’t see they’re smiling because they’ve got masks on, but waving, and the one woman’s got a Thank You sign on. The one towards the lower left are people spread out watching us drive through. There were people on balconies. It was really cool, people were waving and they love the horn noise certainly coming through there. These cars make people happy. They make them (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 5 smile. When you constantly have people waving or stopping to tell you a story about someone they knew that had the same car. It’s what I enjoy. It’s what I like. Back in my workshop again. This is the car that I bought with my daughter and restored it just before she turned 16. So this is another one. That’s going on at my garage at our other Queensbury house. The top left photo, proud day when she passed her driver’s test and she did it on a manual transmission and there were a lot of tears between the start of that process and that picture being taken on it, but again, proud day there passing the test. I’m showing you the other pictures, the larger one there to give an idea of why I’m looking to put a lift in the new workshop It was at Jiffy Lube that the oil pump got stripped. I had to replace, you’ve got to replace the whole oil pan on these with a mini because it’s an aluminum pan. So you have to take apart the whole front end. So to give you an idea how much I’m taking these cars apart, and if you take a look at it, it’s up on jack stands. I put the wheels underneath it in order to, just an additional safety item on it. No question l ift, safer, easier on my neck and easier on my body. I use cardboard to slide in to try to get underneath it. This car brand it’s a mini, right, because it’s small and even in a 24 by 24 garage it’s still tight in the front and the rear to work on it and when I take them apart, or even this one coming apart, you’ve got to store the parts somewhere and that becomes a big issue. So this took me three months because my daughter’s got a different car that she’s driving. So it took me three months and I had limited time to work on it. So I’m doing it kind of between times. So during that time, the good part about it is I can lock the garage door and it’s there and I’m not worried about somebody getting hurt or messing around with anything that’s in th ere or anybody coming in to the garage really disturbing the project or getting injured. There’s me in 1985, no, I’m sorry, yes, 1985 in the top left. When I was in high school I bought my second car and it was my second car. My first one was a Ford pin up station wagon. The second one I bought in 1982 for $450, 1965 Barracuda. I restored that one through high school while I drove it. Two years ago I found, that’s the top left corner, is me in 1985 after it was finished. So two years ago I found a ’65 Barracuda that had been stored in a garage for 35 years. So the top left is me again in ’85. The bottom left picture is me 34 years later buying my current project in Dallas, Texas. I got it down in Texas. This is something I’ve enjoyed my w hole life. So the center picture really shows, why am I looking for the higher ceiling in the new workshop. Not only can I raise the car up to work on it and if you take a look, even when I’m putting the motor back into the Barracuda, I have it up on jack stands, but you really need room to go, to maneuver above the cars as well. So the right side is the Barracuda. It’s pretty cool. It’s back from the body shop, finished paint.. We got that completed. So I’m kind of chomping at the bit to begin reassembly on the Barracuda. So if you want to go to the last slide, please. So that’s actually a picture, the bottom left, of my old garage with Christine out front. So, again, I hope this helps with your consideration to understand what I’m actually doing with these cars. The workshop’s where I spend my free time, where I do my projects. Something I’ve enjoyed my whole life. It’s not maintenance activity. It’s restoration back to like new. The proposed design is to safely maneuver restoration equipment as well as space for the car to be apart for potentially years. Christine took about seven years. It’s a secure workshop, separate from the normal daily activities of a garage, not just for my safety, but also for the safety of my family, an d again it’s a proposed design as a workshop where I can lock the door when I have to leave and know that when I come back things will be as they were without disturbing anybody or potentially putting anybody at risk. My old garage, never a single complaint, negative environmental impact with my former workshop. I assure you there’ll be none with this one, either. So thanks for your time. I’m happy to answer any questions about what I do. MR. KUHL-Excuse me. You actually lock the doors? MR. GRASMEDER-I lock the doors. Yes. MR. KUHL-Where do you come from, Brooklyn? If, in fact, the approval of this was based on having to make it 16 feet instead of 18’ 11”, could you do it? MR. FLYNN-I would say no, just based on the cars. MR. KUHL-No is good. Also you talked about the garage door, showing his Thunderbird and the garage door sliding up. You could do doors on hinges, okay. The one thing I didn’t understand, you talked about some kind of storage. Is that what you were talking in the existing garage, the store upstairs? MR. FLYNN-Yes, that’s the existing garage, using attic trusses for Christmas decorations. MR. KUHL-It’s very interesting. I sit here, and I realize you’re representing Dan, but you also know that we have rules and regulations, and you don’t have a commercial property. You have a residential property and you come here asking us for a lot of things, and I think you should, I have an older vehicle, all right. So I’m not immune to working on older vehicles. I understand your passion and what you do. I even like the project, okay, but bottom line of it is, you know, you also have to consider putting the shoe in the foot or the foot in the shoe and I don’t know, you know, you have a passion. I understand. You might be asking for a lot for that passion or you might have to reduce it. I don’t know. I’m just suggesting. Okay. MR. FLYNN-Just if I could, one comment to that. I realize Zoning and Planning Boards, you guys are always acting in the spirit and intent of the Code, as you guys look at it and interpret it. I realize we are asking for a height variance and it’s in place for a reason, especially around the lake, to block view sheds or disrupt views from neighbors in general. I think we have a very unique case of the amount of land they (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 6 have. It’s within a wooded area. We’re not asking for a lot when it comes to that height. We’ve gone through great deals to limit that height yet still keep it aesthetically pleasing. We do drive arou nd the lake and notice a lot of these detached garages and they’re very squatty in nature. I think as a result for that 16 foot height I think we’re working within that spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and trying to work within those guidelines and also get Dan what he needs from a functional standpoint over time. You can see how passionate Dan is about these cars and the amount of time and investment into finally getting a garage that he’s always wanted I think is very important overall to the app lication and I’d just ask for you to look at it in that nature, that it is a unique case compared to maybe other applications. It’s a larger lot. We hope those are considerations the Board takes into account. MR. GRASMEDER-Also we’re trying to maintain the look of the roof lines and other things of the main house because that’s the first thing that comes in. Each time we move it down. MR. FLYNN-It just becomes squatty. It doesn’t start to look good. It takes the floor space away, the overall height. MR. MC CABE-Do we have other questions of the applicant? MR. URRICO-Yes. Did you say your car’s name is Christine? MR. GRASMEDER-Yes. MR. URRICO-Do you know who the previous owner was? MR. GRASMEDER-Yes. I do. MR. URRICO-It wasn’t Steven King by any chance. MR. GRASMEDER-That’s how it got the name. MRS. HAMLIN-The first time, the very first time, it was a Zoom meeting. Passion, I think you almost had tears in your eyes. It’s very unique and normally I’m just cut and dried. My main concern, others have cared about the height so much. I think you’re pretty wooded there. You don’t have the biggest lot that we’ve granted second garages to, and often those people may just have a one car garage attached to their house or at the most two. You have three and now you’re asking for this other space. The bottom line, I guess what’s holding me back is the is the fluids and such. You said none of that’s going to happen, repair, but then you talked about removing the oil pan and stuff. So what kind of remediation can you put in this garage along the scale of something commercial if necessary. I know it’s your passion, you love it, so you can make it happen. I’m just concerned, this is the lake, and anything, you know, if it was a commercial garage it would have oil traps and that type of thing. I just want to make sure those kind of, before I would even consider putting this second garage, which really isn’t just putting cars in it, despite what you said, I want assurance that there’s not going to be anything spilled, anything going to the water. MR. FLYNN-I don’t want to speak for my clients, but I know part of the reason they’re moving to Lake George and preservation of, when it comes to vehicles or houses or the lake, that’s their main thought. They invest a lot into the local within the area. MRS. HAMLIN-No offense, but prayers and wishes. Physically what can you guys do? MR. FLYNN-So there will be no drains internal within the garage. So there’s no oil, even oil water separators that we’re trying to, any of the chemicals or the oils coming off the cars will stay within the garage itself. MRS. HAMLIN-And he’s not painting, but he’s power coating parts? MR. FLYNN-There is a small oven. So as Dan’s mentioned, if it’s a small bolt or piece or a brake pad, for instance, when you take a brake pad off and you’re painting that, that’s a small piece that might be spray painted and then baked within the space. So the chemical, there’s no chemical storage. Any leakage I think would, or anything coming out of an oil pan, if he’s changing that at the time, will be cleaned up with cat litter at the time, if there was. We’re also extremely far away from the bodies of water as well. In response to working with Chazen and putting all of those control devices. MRS. HAMLIN-Well groundwater is everywhere. One other question with regards to the addition to the house within the 75 foot, there was a percentage of which that new building was within the 75 foot. Have you reduced that? MR. FLYNN-Yes, we’ve looked at that and overall impervious areas. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 7 MRS. HAMLIN-So it’s more than just impervious area. It’s actually physical built part of the house has been taken. MR. FLYNN-The physical part of the house is the same. MRS. HAMLIN-Is the same. MR. FLYNN-However the overall impervious area on the site is down 40% within that 75 foot setback. MRS. HAMLIN-Okay. Since the last time we saw it? MR. FLYNN-Since the last time you saw it, and we’ve added more shoreline buffers and shoreline restoration. MRS. HAMLIN-Yes, I heard all that. I was just wondering what that 40% was. Okay. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Other questions of the applicant? Seeing none, I think the public hearing is still open because I had to open it before. So I’m going to seek input from the public. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN KATHY GRASMEDER MRS. GRASMEDER-Could I make just one comment? For the record I’m Kathy Grasmeder. I’m one of the owners, and so just wanted to give a little bit of summary of some of the things of the meetings that we’ve had before and hit some of the points that I’m thinking. That we do have three drivers and we have a three car garage. It’s really important, especially during the winter months, to be able to get these cars in the garage for snow removal. You saw how tight it is in that driveway area. In my opinion, the workshop needs to be separate. It needs to be separate from the standpoint of, these cars are apart for months and years and it’s a safety issue as well as, we need a place to be able to park our cars out of the space where we’re clearing snow. Someone recently said to me there’s very little great architecture that is left on Lake George and I want to re-iterate in the main house, the main room of the house is a pinch point. There’s two stone porches on two of the sides. There’s a fireplace and a really grand staircase. It’s all four sides have these limitations, a 1920’s kitchen for, we don’t remember what they entailed, but it was a sink, it was a work table and it was a wood stove. So the size of the kitchen or how a kitchen is configured now is very different than a 1920’s home. There were no refrigerators, no dishwashers, no microwaves at that time. So this has been a challenging project to figure out how do we get a house that’s modernized and that’s how our team of architects, the site engineer and everybody helping us worked together to come up with these ideas of the addition, trying to minimize the impact on the environment, on the lake. I think without question we want to preserve the lake and we want to preserve this old architecture. So I believe the workshop is part of that, and because this is the first thing that you see as you’re coming down the driveway and that I believe that the garage, this workshop has to be congruent with this incredible architecture that we’re trying to restore. So my request is we really have put a lot of heads together. We feel like we’ve come up with a great plan to be able to preserve the lake as well as the architecture and ask that you consider giving us that approval. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Is there anybody else that would like to address the Board on this particular project? Seeing no one, Roy, we had a couple of letters before that you already read in. Is there anything additional? MR. URRICO-There’s nothing new. MR. MC CABE-So at this particular time I’m going to close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MC CABE-I’m going to poll the Board, and I’m going to start with me. So I support this project for several reasons. I think that it’s worthy to protect the old architecture. I think that the fact that the house is not 75 back from the lake isn’t really a big deal because of the topography. The further back the house is, the higher it is, and therefore any runoff is going to have more energy. So certainly moving the main structure back is of little value. The changes to the main house aren’t going to move anything closer to the water. They’re right where the house is now. They aren’t going to change the height of the house. They’re actually less than the house is now. With respect to the second garage, in Queensbury you’re allowed one garage of 1100 square feet if you’re on .15 acres or if you’re on five acres. We’ve raised issue with this and been told that’s why you can grant variances, and indeed we granted just such a variance to a house down the road on Dark Bay for a similar sized property. So then the question is, does it ha ve to be bigger than the 1100 square feet and the 16 feet. I think the applicant here has reduced the size of the asking for the garage several times. He’s tried to meet our requirements, and I am impressed with that, and I also agree with the applicant that there’s value in having the architectural appeal of the garage similar to the house. So therefore I support this project. John? (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 8 MR. HENKEL-I guess I can’t say anymore. You’ve said it all. I agree with you and I agree with the project. MR. MC CABE-Brent? MR. MC DEVITT-What I would say is, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I agree. You summed that up very well. But just to reiterate a couple of your points that I think are important. A wooded area. We have a unique case here. We have a larger lot. Maintaining the look of the roof lines I think is very important. I support the protection of the old architecture. I applaud you for that. I think that we need more of that on the lake . Additionally the topography works here. It works to the benefit and it makes it easier, I think, at least for myself and I believe others here. So moving the structure back is really of little value in this case. This is a unique case. That’s a unique property. It’s a unique case. So you reduced the size of the second garage and that was an issue for me. You’ve gone to the drawing board. I give you credit. You’ve done a lot of work on this. You’ve reduced the size several times. At the end of the day I’m impressed with the depth of this, where this has landed. I’m impressed with this. So long story shore I’m in favor of the project. MR. FLYNN-Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-My previous concerns I think you’ve alleviated those. I was under the impression you were going to be taking in there and taking off old paint off the old cars with lead and stuff like that. I think you have to be real sensitive around the waterfront residential area. So I’m going to relinquish my previous position and go with the flow and approve what you have proposed for the garage. As far as the house itself goes I think the dormers themselves aren’t going to be any higher than what previously existed. So I’d be in favor of that, too. MR. MC CABE-Cathy? MRS. HAMLIN-Yes, I appreciate that you kept going back to the drawing board and I’m a little more rest assured that you’ve explained the oil and other types of fluids as an environmental issue, and also the 40% reduction in the impervious surfaces as well as those buffers that you’ve added should alleviate whatever problems we had with that 75 foot setback. So I’m going to in vote in favor this time of granting those variances. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR. KUHL-Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think if you were looking to expand the existing garage it wouldn’t do well at all. It would look like a big ugly structure. The work you’re doing to the house is good. It really is, and actually the second garage I think is going to compliment your whole effort here and the challenge we have is when we allow people variances people come down the block and say you gave it to them, why can’t I get it. I believe that the two foot 11 inches you’re looking for is going to blend in with the way you’re designing and developing the garage. So believe it or not I am in favor of this project. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes. I’m going to go along with everybody else. MR. MC CABE-So it sounds like we have a project here. MR. FLYNN-Could I add one thing. I believe it was Brent’s comment when you were discussing the topography would make it difficult. You were referencing the main residence and not the garage at the time. MR. MC DEVITT-Correct. Thank you for clarifying that. MR. MC CABE-So at this particular time, I’m going to make a motion. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Trevor Flynn, Balzer & Tuck Architecture. (Revised) Applicant proposes to construct an 884 sq. ft. living room/kitchen addition to the west of the existing primary dwelling, a 436 sq. ft. breezeway addition to the south of the primary dwelling, connecting the existing detached garage and reorientation of the roof on the garage. The project also includes construction of a new detached garage of 1,315 sq. ft. which would include two levels and height of 18 ft. 11 ½ inches. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, new building within 50 ft. of 15% slopes, expansion of a nonconforming structure, and major stormwater. Relief requested for shoreline setback, height of detached garage, height of the alterations to the main home, number of garages, and size of garage. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 9 Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for shoreline setback of main home, height of the alterations to the main home and the new garage, number of garages, and size of garage. Parcel is located in the Waterfront Residential zone –WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, 179-5-020 garage, 179-13-010 expansion of non-conforming structure, 179- 2-010 garage, private parking The single-story addition to the main home is to be located 56.6 ft. from the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required. The two roof dormer additions of the home are to be 33 ft. 6 inches where 28 ft. is the maximum height allowed. The new garage is to be reduced to 18 ft. 11 ½ inches previously 21 ft. 4 inches in height where an accessory structure is limited to 16 ft. Relief is also requested to have more than one garage and size of the garage 1,220 sq. ft. floor area where maximum size allowed on lot would be 1,100 sq. ft. (Noting the garage lower level is 644 sq. ft., the upper level is 576 sq. ft.; the workshop is 644 sq. ft. and is not considered in the garage floor area due to the features associated with the workshop—wood floor workbench but is accounted for /added in the total floor area of buildings on the site). A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, May 19, 2021, Wednesday, June 16, 2021 (opened and remained open); Wednesday, June 23, 2021; July 21, 2021. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: 1. There is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because we believe that the work that’s being done is going to improve the overall look of the property and this is further evidenced by letters of support from nearby neighbors. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered by the Board but are not deemed reasonable. At this particular time we believe that all the alternatives would result in a worse situation than what we have now. 3. The requested variance is not substantial. The main issue would be the second garage, but again, the fact that Queensbury has a one size fits all garage criteria in its laws doesn’t allow for larger properties such as this. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. In fact we believe that the environmental conditions are going to be improved substantially by collecting and treating the runoff. Right now the runoff is basically unrestrained and this particular project will bring the runoff under control and we believe that that’s going to result in a substantial improvement in the environment. 5. The alleged difficulty is not entirely self-created. Part of the problem was created with the original installation of the property being too close to the water and being higher than what is currently allowed, and the second garage, again, is because of the one size fits all zoning with respect to garages. 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; Make no mistake, the Board has considered every aspect of this variance request and we find that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary. 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 29-2021 TREVOR FLYNN, BALZER & TUCK ARCHITECTURE, Introduced by Michael McCabe, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brent McDevitt: Duly adopted this 21st Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Henkel, Mrs. Hamlin, Mr. Urrico, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Underwood, Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/21/2021) 10 MR. MC CABE-Congratulations, you have a project. MR. FLYNN-Thank you. MR. GRASMEDER-Thank you.